Absolutely Null and Utterly Void The 1968 Rite of Episcopal Consecration — Rev. Anthony Cekada — www.traditionalmass.org

would need to be conditionally ordained first, because “Once there are no more valid priests they’ll Paul VI had changed the rite for Holy Orders. permit the Latin Mass.” The Archbishop explained that the new form (es- — Rev. Carl Pulvermacher OFMCap sential formula) in the rite for priestly ordination was Former Editor, The Angelus doubtful because one word had been subtracted. The “Keep the shell, but empty it of its substance.” new form for episcopal consecration, the Arch- — V.I. Lenin bishop continued, was completely different and thus invalid. IN THE 1960’S* Catholics who were upset by the post- Despite the gravity of the question, only a few tra- Vatican II liturgical changes had already begun to ditionalist writers examined the post-Vatican II ordi- 1 worry whether sacraments conferred with the re- nation rites, even after Tridentine Indult Masses formed rites were valid. A defining moment in the started to multiply. Increasingly, these were offered by United States came in 1967 when Patrick Henry Omlor priests ordained by bishops consecrated in the new published the first edition of his study, Questioning the rite, and belonging to groups such as the Fraternity of Validity of Masses using the All-English Canon, a work St. Peter. If their ordaining bishops were invalidly that, even before the promulgation of the Novus Ordo consecrated, the sacraments these priests confected in 1969, galvanized the then-tiny traditionalist resis- would likewise be invalid. tance. After Benedict XVI was elected in 2005, however, As the modernist “reformers” overhauled the other the issue resurfaced. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, ap- sacramental rites — Confirmation, Penance and Ex- pointed an Archbishop and Cardinal by Paul VI, had treme Unction — traditionalists questioned the valid- been consecrated with the new rite on May 25, 1977. ity of these sacraments as well, and sought out priests Was he, apart from the sede vacante controversy, even a who offered the traditional Mass and used the old real bishop? rites. In the summer of 2005, a French traditionalist pub- Holy Orders was the one sacrament that tradition- lisher, Editions Saint-Remi, published the first vol- 2 alists did not seem to worry about. Sure, there were no ume of Rore Sanctifica, a book-length dossier of docu- vocations. But since few laymen had ever even seen an mentation and commentary on the Paul VI Rite of ordination — still less knew what made an ordination Episcopal Consecration. The study, featuring on its valid — how or whether the liturgical changes affected cover side-by-side photos of Ratzinger and SSPX Su- the validity of Holy Orders was a topic that went un- perior General Mgr. Bernard Fellay, concluded that examined. the new rite was invalid. I encountered the issue by chance during my first This naturally caught the attention of higher-ups in year (1975-76) at the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) semi- the SSPX in Europe, who were by then negotiating nary at Ecône, Switzerland. I went to ask Archbishop with Benedict XVI to obtain special status in the Vati- Marcel Lefebvre about whether conservative friends can II church. How could SSPX’s superiors rally tradi- from my former seminary could work with the Society tionalists to a pope who may not even be a bishop? after ordination. He told me yes, in principle, but they The Dominicans in Avrillé, France, a traditionalist religious order in the SSPX orbit, immediately took up the task of trying to make a convincing case for the

* FATHER ANTHONY CEKADA teaches sacramental moral theology, canon 1. The only widely-circulated study in English I know of is R. Coomaras- law, and liturgy at Most Holy Trinity Seminary, Brooksville Florida. He was wamy, “The Post-Conciliar Rite of Holy Orders,” Studies in Comparative Relig- ordained in 1977 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and has written numerous ion 16.2-2. articles and studies putting forth the traditionalist case. He resides near Cin- 2. Rore Sanctifica: Invalidité du Rite de Consécration Épiscopale de ‘Pontificalis cinnati, where he offers the traditional Latin Mass. Romani’ (Editions Saint-Remi 2005). rore-sanctifica.org — 1 — validity of the new rite. One of them, Fr. Pierre-Marie wildered by talk of Copts, Maronites, Hippolytus and OP, produced a lengthy article in favor of it that the the mysterious governing Spirit. Dominicans published in their quarterly, Sel de la Terre.3 I. Principles to Apply Thilo Stopka, a former SSPX seminarian in Europe, challenged Fr. Pierre-Marie’s conclusions, and in turn PRIMARILY for the benefit of lay readers, we will re- published a great deal of valuable research on the In- view some principles that are used to determine ternet to refute them. whether a sacramental form is valid. The concepts are Meanwhile, the SSPX’s official U.S. publication, not complicated. The Angelus, promptly translated Fr. Pierre-Marie’s article into English, publishing it in two successive A. What is a Sacramental Form? issues (December 2005, January 2006) under the title In catechism class we all learned the definition of a “Why the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration is sacrament: “An outward sign, instituted by Christ to Valid.” give grace.” I find it ironic and particularly sad that such an “Outward sign” in the definition refers to what we article appeared in The Angelus. In August 1977 I vis- see and hear when a sacrament is conferred — the ited an old-line traditionalist in Upper Michigan, Bill priest pours the water on the baby’s head and he re- Hanna. He passed along a favorite quote from Fr. Carl cites the formula “I baptize you,” etc. Pulvermacher, a Capuchin who worked with SSPX Catholic theology teaches that in every sacrament and would later edit The Angelus: “Once there are no this outward sign consists of two elements joined to- more valid priests, they’ll permit the Latin Mass.” gether: Father Carl, it seems, had a bit of the prophet in • Matter: some thing or action your senses can per- him. ceive (pouring water, bread and wine, etc.) In his Angelus article, Fr. Pierre-Marie argued that • Form: the words recited that actually produce the Paul VI Rite of Episcopal Consecration is valid be- the sacramental effect (“I baptize you…” “This is My cause it uses prayers to consecrate bishops that are body…,” etc.) virtually the same as those (a) used in the Catholic Each sacramental rite, no matter how many other Church’s eastern rites, or (b) once used in the ancient prayers and ceremonies the Church has prescribed for Church. it, contains at least one sentence that either Catholic Please note: Paul VI made these same two claims theologians or authoritative Church pronouncements when he promulgated the new consecration rite in have designated as its essential sacramental form. 1968, and both are demonstrably false. It is appalling that the SSPX superiors recycled them to market the B. Omitting the Form validity of that same rite to an unsuspecting tradition- alist laity. All Catholics know verbatim at least one essential To support this argument, Fr. Pierre-Marie offered sacramental form: “I baptize you in the name of the several tables that compare various Latin texts. These Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” we will discuss in an appendix. If at a baptism, the priest says all the other prayers As for the rest of his article, most readers probably and performs all the other ceremonies, but omits this came away from it utterly baffled. For although Fr. one formula when he pours the water, the sacrament Pierre-Marie said he would “proceed according to the is invalid (does not “work”), the grace promised by Scholastic method so as to treat the matter as rigor- Christ is not conferred and the baby is not baptized. ously as possible,” he never managed to focus clearly This much should be obvious. on the two central questions: (1) What principles does Catholic theology employ C. Changes in the Form to determine whether a sacramental form is valid or But another question arises: What if the wording of invalid? a sacramental form is changed? How does this affect (2) How do those principles apply to the new rite validity? of episcopal consecration? The answer depends on whether a change in We will answer both questions here, and draw the meaning also results. Theologians distinguish between appropriate conclusions. Our discussion may be a bit two types of change: technical at times — so I have provided a summary (1) Substantial. (Meaning changed = invalid.) (sect. XI) to which a reader may skip if he gets too be- This occurs “when the meaning of the form itself is corrupted… if the words would have a meaning dif-

3. Sel de la Terre 54 (Fall 2005), 72–129. — 2 — ferent from that intended by the Church.”4 Or put an- in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the other way: If the form “is changed in such a way that Holy Ghost. Amen.”10 the meaning intended or willed by Christ is no longer This preserves each concept that theologians say completely and congruently expressed through it.”5 must appear in a valid form for baptism: the minister A substantial change in a sacramental form is in- (at least implicitly), the act of baptizing, the recipient, troduced through adding, omitting, corrupting, trans- the unity of the divine essence, and the Trinity of per- posing, or exchanging words in the form, or by inter- sons expressed under distinct names.11 rupting them in such a way that the form no longer In the case of an Eastern schismatic group that has retains the same sense.6 Here are two examples: submitted to the pope, moreover, the Church has ex- • Corruption of words: A modernist priest says: “I amined the prayers and ceremonies of its sacramental baptize you in the name of the Mother, and of the rites to insure that they were free from doctrinal error Son…” He has introduced a new word that changes and contained everything necessary for conferring the meaning of one of the essential elements of the true sacraments. form — Father. The baptism is invalid.7 So, if a bishop or priest confers a sacrament using a • Omission of words: A nervous young priest who sacramental form identical to one contained in a duly- has not memorized the form says: “I baptize in the approved Eastern Rite ritual book, one can be certain name of the Father, and of the Son…,” omitting the that the sacrament will be valid. word you. Or alternately, he says the word you, but This principle will figure in our discussion as well, omits the word baptize. Since a sacramental form must because Fr. Pierre-Marie bases much of his argument express in some way who is receiving the sacrament as for the validity of the new rite on elements supposedly well as the sacramental action itself, omitting the you or common both to Eastern Rite episcopal consecration the baptize changes the meaning and renders the form forms and the new form of Paul VI. invalid.8 It was also this same claim by Father Franz (2) Accidental. (Meaning same = still valid.) Schimdberger — the new form was “Eastern Rite” — This is a change that does not alter substantial that led Archbishop Lefebvre to abandon his original meaning. position that the new rite of episcopal consecration Example: Instead of saying “I baptize you…,” the was invalid.12 priest says “I cleanse you in the name of the Father…” Because he has merely substituted an exact synonym E. Requirements in a Form for Holy Orders for one of the words in the form (“baptize” is Greek What specifically are we looking for in the new for “cleanse”), the meaning remained the same. The rite of episcopal consecration? What must the words of change was therefore only accidental. The baptism a form for conferring Holy Orders express? 9 was valid. Pius XII, in his Apostolic Constitution Sacramen- This distinction between a substantial and an acci- tum Ordinis, laid down the general principle when he dental change will be a key concept in examining the declared that for Holy Orders these must “univocally validity of the 1968 form of episcopal consecration. If signify the sacramental effects — that is, the power of the new form constitutes a substantial change in the Order and the grace of the Holy Ghost.”13 meaning, it is invalid. Note the two elements that it must univocally (i.e., unambiguously) express: the specific order being con- D. Using an Eastern Rite Form ferred (diaconate, priesthood or episcopacy) and the The forms the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church grace of the Holy Ghost. use to confer sacraments sometimes differ greatly in So we must therefore ascertain whether the new wording from those the Latin Rite uses. But the sub- form is indeed “univocal” in expressing these effects. stantial meanings are always the same. Example: The Ukranian Rite uses the following F. Episcopal Consecration in Particular form for Baptism: “The servant of God N. is baptized In the same document, having laid down a general principle, Pius XII then declared that the following 4. H. Merkelbach, Summa Theologiae Moralis 8th ed. (Montreal: Desclée 1949) 3:20. “Quando ipse sensus forma corrumpitur… habeat sensum diversum a sensu intento ab Ecclesia.” 10. Quoted Cappello 1:777. 5. M. Coronata, De Sacramentis (Turin: Marietti 1953) 1:13. “modificatur ita 11. See Merkelbach 3:127. ut sensus a Christo intentus seu volitus non amplius per ipsam complete et 12. Bishop Donald Sanborn relates the following: In an early 1983 conversa- congruenter exprimatur.” tion with the Archbishop and Fr. Schmidberger over the SSPX/Vatican nego- 6. F. Cappello, De Sacramentis (Rome: Marietti 1951) 1:15. tiations then taking place (plus ça change…), he asked how the Society could 7. Cappello 1:15, “forma irrita est, si nova vox ex corruptione in substan- accept any solution at all, since the Archbishop had told us many times that he tialibus inducantur.” considered the new rite of episcopal consecration invalid. The Archbishop 8. Cappello 1:15, “detractione: forma irritatur, si tollantur verba exprimentia replied, “Apparently, it is valid,” and made a gesture for Fr. Schmidberger to actionem sacramentalem aut subjectum.” speak, who then said, “It’s Eastern Rite.” 9. E. Regatillo, Jus Sacramentarium (Santander: Sal Terrae 1949), 8. “Trans- 13. Const. Apost. Sacramentum Ordinis (30 November 1947), DZ 2301. ¶4. mutatione, adhibitis verbis synonimis: si sint omnino synonima et usu com- “quibus univoce significantur effectus sacramentales — scilicet potestas Ordi- muni recepta, forma valet.” nis et gratia Spiritus Sancti.” — 3 — words, contained in the consecratory Preface for the copacy” — i.e., thrill the eastern schismatics, who also Rite of Episcopal Consecration, were the essential sac- used these rites. “This was an ecumenical argument. It ramental form for conferring the episcopacy: was decisive.”17 “Complete in thy priest the fullness of Thy minis- So Botte’s text, lifted nearly verbatim from his try, and adorned in the raiment of all glory, sanctify 1963 work, became the new Preface for Episcopal Con- him with the dew of heavenly anointing.”14 secration when Paul VI promulgated it in June 1968.18 This form univocally signifies the sacramental ef- fects as follows: III. The Paul VI Form (1) “The fullness of Thy ministry,” “raiment of all glory” = power of the Order of episcopacy. Paul VI designated the following passage in the (2) “The dew of heavenly anointing” = grace of the Preface as the new form for the consecration of a Holy Ghost. bishop: The question is whether the new form does the “So now pour out upon this chosen one that power same. which is from you, the governing Spirit whom you gave to your beloved Son, Jesus Christ, the Spirit given II.Origin of the New Rite by him to the holy apostles, who founded the Church in every place to be your temple for the unceasing IN 1964 PAUL VI entrusted implementing the liturgical glory and praise of your name.”19 changes prescribed by Vatican II to a new Vatican The dispute over the validity of the new Rite of agency known as the “Consilium.” This organization Episcopal Consecration centers on this passage. was composed of several hundred clergymen, divided At first glance, it does seem to mention the Holy according to their areas of expertise into thirty-nine Ghost. However, it does not appear to specify the “study groups.” The Secretary of Consilium and its power of Holy Order being conferred — the fullness of real head was Fr. Annibale Bugnini, a liturgical mod- the priesthood that constitutes the episcopacy — that ernist and alleged Freemason, who had written the the traditional form so clearly expressed. Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. So, is this new form capable of conferring the epis- Study Group 20 had the task of “reforming” the copacy? rites for Holy Orders. Its head was the Benedictine To answer that, we will apply the principles out- monk Dom Bernard Botte (1893–1980), a specialist in lined in section one. We proceed from stronger argu- Oriental liturgical languages and another liturgical ments for validity to weaker ones. modernist. His most famous academic achievement was a IV. An Eastern Rite Form? new scholarly edition of The Apostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus, a collection of ancient Christian liturgical Question: Was the new form employed in a Catholic 15 texts. One of these would become the New Mass’s Eastern Rite as the sacramental form for conferring the Eucharistic Prayer II — minus its original references to episcopacy? the devil, hell, the salvation of just believers alone, and If so, this would be the strongest evidence for ar- the sacrificing priest. guing that the new form is valid. One could demon- Dom Botte proposed that another text from this strate that it therefore met the criteria Pius XII enunci- same collection be introduced into the Rite of Episco- ated regarding the form for Holy Orders, because it pal Consecration to replace the traditional consecra- would already be among the words “accepted and tory Preface. The old Preface, he said, had “poor doc- used by the Church in that sense.”20 trinal content,” was oriented “almost exclusively to- In his Apostolic Constitution promulgating the wards the bishop’s liturgical role,” was a “hybrid for- new rite, Paul VI says that new Preface for Episcopal 16 mula, poorly balanced.” Something was needed that Consecration is taken from The Apostolic Tradition of better expressed the theology of Vatican II. Hippolytus (a document we shall discuss in section V), The prayer for episcopal consecration from Hip- which continues to be used “in large part” for episco- polytus, said Dom Botte, survived in “more evolved” versions in the Syrian and Coptic Eastern Rites. Used in the Roman Rite, he said, it also “would affirm a 17. B. Botte, From Silence to Participation: An Insider’s View of Liturgical Renewal (Washington: Pastoral 1988), 135. unity of outlook between East and West on the epis- 18. Apostolic Constitution Pontificalis Romani (18 June 1968), AAS 60 (1968), 369–73. 19. ICEL translation. “Et nunc effunde super hunc Electum eam virtutem, 14. Sacr. Ord. Dz 2301. ¶5. “Comple in Sacerdote tuo ministerii tui summam, quae a te est, Spiritum principalem, quem dedisti dilecto Filio Tuo Jesu et ornamentis totius glorificationis instructum coelestis unguenti rore sancti- Christo, quem Ipse donavit sanctis Apostolis, qui constituerunt Ecclesiam per fica.” singula loca, ut sanctuarium tuum, in gloriam et laudem indeficientem 15. La Tradition Apostolique de Saint Hippolyte: Essai de Reconstitution, 2nd ed. nominis tui. (Munster: Aschendorff 1963). 20. Sacr. Ord., DZ 2301, ¶4: “quaequae ab Ecclesia qua talia accipiuntur et 16. B. Botte, “L’Ordination de l’Évêque,” Maison-Dieu 97 (1969), 119-20. usurpantur.” — 4 — pal consecrations by two Catholic Eastern Rites in omnipotens, which in the ritual itself is called the [im- particular: the Coptic and the West Syrian. position-of-hands] prayer.”23 And indeed on this basis, Fr. Pierre-Marie argued: Note the following: “The utilization of the form that is in use in two cer- (1) This prayer is a Preface about 340 words tainly valid Eastern rites assures its validity.”21 long in a Latin version.24 The Paul VI form is 42 words But is the factual claim really true? Is the Paul VI long. The two forms, therefore, cannot be equated. form indeed in use in two Eastern Rites? (2) This lengthy Coptic form mentions three All one need do is (1) ascertain from theology specific sacramental powers considered proper to the books which Eastern Rite consecration prayers are order of bishop alone: “to provide clergy according to considered the sacramental forms, (2) look up those His commandment for the priesthood… to make new texts, and (3) compare them with the Paul VI form. houses of prayer, and to consecrate altars.”25 Two general points immediately emerge to defeat Though the Paul VI Preface surrounding the new the Eastern Rite argument: form contains many phrases found in the Coptic form (1) The sacramental form that Paul VI prescribed (including “governing spirit,” which we shall discuss for conferring the episcopacy consists of merely one below), these phrases are missing. sentence. Eastern Rite forms, however, consist of a This omission is particularly significant, because whole prayer, or even a series of prayers, several hun- the dispute over the validity of the Paul VI form re- dred words long. volves around whether it adequately expresses the So on the face of it, the Paul VI form — a mere 42 power of the Order being conferred — i.e., episcopacy. words long in Latin — cannot be described as a form “in use in two certainly valid Eastern Rites.” B. Maronite Rite Form? (2) Nor could one even claim that the entire Paul In the 5th century, some Syrians became mono- VI Preface of Episcopal Consecration (212 words long physite heretics, and (like the Copts) went into schism in Latin) is somehow a form “in use in two certainly after the Council of Chalcedon. These are also known valid Eastern Rites.” The Preface does indeed contain as “Jacobites,” after Jacob Baradai, who was clandes- some phrases found in Eastern Rite forms — but there tinely consecrated a bishop in the 6th century and or- are significant omissions and variations. It is still not ganized their movement. identical to any one of them. Other West Syrians who opposed the mono- So on both counts, the new form cannot be among physites came to be called Maronites (after the mon- the words “accepted and used by the Church” as a astery of St. Maro, their center). Most Maronites sacramental form for Holy Orders. eventually settled in Lebanon and were known for Here are some of the details. their deep devotion to the Holy See. The Maronites adopted some externals of the Ro- A. Coptic Rite Form? man Rite (vestments, altar style, etc.) but continued This uniate group descends from monophysite otherwise to follow the Rite of Antioch, one of the an- heretics (= Christ has only one nature), who, after the cient patriarchal sees. Council of Chalcedon (451) went into schism, led by According to Denzinger, the form for the episco- the Patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt, and then went into pacy in the Maronite Rite consists of the prayers: a long decline. (See Appendix.) “Deus qui universam Ecclesiam tuam per istos pontifices in By the 19th century, enough Copts had renounced manus impositione exornas, etc., Deus deorum et Dominus their errors and submitted to the pope for the Holy See dominantium.”26 to organize them into their own uniate Rite. Comparing this with the Paul VI form reveals the In 1898 their Synod decreed that, for the three following: major orders in the Coptic Rite, “the form is the actual prayer which the ordaining bishop recites while im- 23. H. Denziger, Ritus Orientalium, Coptorum, Syrorum et Armenorum posing hands on the ordinand.”22 The 19th-century (Würzburg: Stahel 1863), hereafter “RO,” 1:140. “Apud Coptitias est oratio illa, Qui es, Dominator, Deus omnipotens, quae in ipso rituale eorum dicitur oratio dogmatic theologian Heinrich Denzinger, best known cheirotonías.” for his Enchiridion Symbolorum, a collection of dog- 24. See RO 2:23–24. It is divided into two sections. According to the rubric in the footnote, the consecrating bishop continues to hold his hand imposed matic texts, also published a collection of Eastern Rite during the part following the interjection of the Archdeacon. liturgical texts, the Ritus Orientalium. In his lengthy 25. Translation in O.H.E. KHS-Burmester, Ordination Rites of the Coptic Church (Cairo: 1985), 110–1. RO 2:24 renders the “provide clergy…priesthood” phrase introduction to this work, Denzinger further specifies into Latin as: “constitutendi cleros (klêros Arabs: Clericos) secundum manda- tum ejus ad sanctuarium,” giving “in ordine sacerdotali” in a footnote. that the sacramental form for episcopal consecration in 26. RO 1:141. “Apud Syros, Maronitas et Jacobitas, forma episcopatus ex the Coptic Rite “is the prayer Qui es, Dominator, Deus Assemano est in illis duabus orationibus vel in eorum altera: Deus, qui uni- versam Ecclesiam tuam per istos pontifices in manus impositione exornas, etc., Deus deorum et Dominus dominantium, quae apud utrosque sequuntur, 21. “Why the New Rite…” (Jan 2005), 10. postquam episcopus manum impositam tenens dixerit: Etiam, [sic] Domine 22. Quoted Cappello 4:732. “In collatione trium ordinum majorum… forma Deus etc.” The text Denzinger gives for the prayer in RO 2:195 actually begins est ipsa oratio quam ordinans recitat, dum manus ordinando imponit.” with “Eia” rather than “Etiam.” The Maronites use both prayers. — 5 — (1) The Maronite form is a Preface at least 370 churches, bless houses, call forth vocations to ecclesi- words long, interspersed with impositions of the astical work.”32 bishop’s hand on the head of the candidate. It prays And once again, even though the Paul VI form that the candidate receive the “sublime episcopal or- and Preface contain some phrases present in the Syrian der,” with subsequent prayers twice begging God to form (e.g., “governing… Spirit,” feed” [the flock], “perfect” his grace and priestly ministry.27 This form “loose bonds”), the foregoing expressions are absent. has nothing in common with the Paul VI form. (3) In the Syrian Rite as in the Maronite Rite, the (2) On a following page of the Maronite Rite for prayer that most closely resembles the Paul VI form Episcopal Consecration, there is a prayer that has some and Preface is the one used for “consecrating” a Patri- phrases in common with the Paul VI form (e.g. “gov- arch.33 erning Spirit”) and Preface (“loose bonds”) but, even Once again, however, it is not a sacramental prayer though it occurs in the ceremony, this is not the for consecrating a bishop, and this is clear from the Maronite sacramental form.28 following: (3) The Maronite prayer that most closely resem- • The Syrian liturgical book prescribes the same bles the Paul VI form and Preface of Episcopal Conse- order of service and prayers for consecrating a bishop cration is one found in the Rite for the Consecration of and for consecrating the Patriarch, with but one a Maronite Patriarch.29 And indeed Fr. Pierre-Marie change in the text. For the consecration of the Patri- reproduces much of the text to support arguments for arch, the presiding bishop omits the prayer designated the validity of the new rite. as the form for episcopal consecration (the prayer Deus, However, this prayer is not a sacramental form for qui omnia per potentiam tuam), and substitutes “the conferring the episcopacy. It is merely an installation Prayer of Clement,”34 the text that resembles the Paul prayer, because the Maronite Patriarch is already a VI Preface. bishop when he is appointed. • Two different terms in Syriac are used to distin- guish the sacramental rite for the consecration of a C. Syrian Rite Form? bishop from the non-sacramental rite for the consecra- From the 17th-19th centuries, various Syrian Jaco- tion of a patriarch. The first rite is called an “imposi- bite bishops, including even a Patriarch of Antioch, tion of hands,” while the second is referred to with a abjured their errors and submitted to the Holy See. In term meaning “to confide or invest someone with a 35 the 19th century the pope set up a Syrian Rite Catholic duty.” Patriarchate of Antioch headquartered in Beiruit, A Syrian liturgist explains: “In the first case [epis- Lebanon. (In the mid-20th century, many Syrian Rite copal consecration], the ordinand receives a charism Catholics lived in Iraq.) different from the one he already possesses… In the The Syrians, like the Maronites, follow the An- second, the Patriarch does not receive a charism dif- tiochene Rite, but there are some differences. ferent from the one he received at the time he was 36 The form for episcopal consecration in the Syrian made a bishop.” rite, according to Denzinger, consists of either the same prayers used by the Maronites, or another: “Deus, qui omnia per potentiam tuam,”30 recited after the Patriarch imposes his right hand on the ordinand’s head. Once again, we compare this with the Paul VI 32. RO 2:97. “eo fine ut… sacerdotes constituat, diaconos ungat: consecret altaria et ecclesias: domibus benedicat: vocationes ad opus (ecclesiasticum) form: faciat.” 31 33. For the prayer instituting the Patriarch, see B. DeSmet, “Le Sacre des (1) The Syrian form is about 230 words long, Éveques dans l’Église Syrienne: Texte,” L’Orient Syrien 8 (1963), 202-4. versus 42 words in the Paul VI form. Again, it is not 34. De Smet, 166-7. “Par le même rite de la chirotonie, c’est-à-dire, les mêmes priéres et le même office avec lesquelles le patriarche lui-même sacre les mé- the same. tropolites et les évêques, par ces mêmes rites ils le sacreront eux aussi… il y a, (2) In even greater detail than the Coptic form, dans le sacre du patriarche, trois élements qui lui sont propre, à savoir:… 2º L’invocation du Saint-Esprit, dont il est écrit de Clément, et que nous donner- the Syrian form enumerates specific sacramental pow- ons plus loin: elle est dit uniquement sur le patriarche par les pontifes qui ers considered proper to the order of bishop: May he l’établissent.” (My emphasis. The first and third elements are the election and the manner of giving the crosier.) The episcopal consecration form and the “create priests, anoint deacons, consecrate altars and installation prayer appear successively on pp. 202-04, where it is easy to com- pare the difference in contents. 35. G. Khouris-Sarkis, “Le Sacre des Éveques dans l’Église Syrienne: Intro- 27. RO 2:195. “recipiat sublimem episcoporum ordinem.” RO 196-7: “perfice duction,” L’Orient Syrien 8 (1963), 140-1, 156-7. “Mais le pontificale… fait une nobiscum gratiam tuam tuumque donum.” “perfice…sacerdotale ministe- distinction entre la consécration conferée aux évêques et celle qui est conférée rium.” au patriarche… et c’est pour cela que le pontificale appelle cette consécration 28. RO 2:198. “Spiritum…Sanctum, illum principalem.” “expellat omnia ‘syom’îdo d-Episqûfé,’ imposition des mains aux évêques. The word used in ligamina.” the title of the ceremony for the patriarch, “’Mettasºrhonûto,’ est l’action de 29. RO 2:220. confier une charge à quelqu’un, de l’en investir.” 30. RO 1:141. “In ordine autem nostro ex codice Florentino desumpto, non 36. Khouris-Sarkis, 140-1. “Dans la prémière, l’élu reçoit un charisme dif- occurrit nisi haec una: Deus, qui omnia per potentiam tuam.” férent de celui qu’il possedait déjà… Dans le second, le patriarche ne reçoit 31. RO 2:97. un charisme différent de celui qu’il a reçu au moment où il a été créé évêque.” — 6 — D. Not an Eastern Form. dating, reconstruction and deciphering of 1700-year- We began this section with a question: Was the new old texts. form employed in a Catholic Eastern Rite as the sacramental form for conferring the episcopacy? A. Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus? The answer is no, because: Here are some of the preliminary problems we • The Paul VI form is not identical to the Eastern discover: Rite forms. (1) Identity of Author? The Jesuit expert on East- • In particular, the lengthy Eastern Rite forms ern liturgies, Jean-Michel Hanssens, devotes nearly mention either perfecting the priesthood or specific one hundred pages to trying to identify Hippolytus: sacramental powers proper to a bishop alone (ordain- Was he the same Hippolytus associated with an Easter ing priests, etc.). The Paul VI form does not. computation table? The one represented by a statue? • In the Maronite and Syrian Rites, the prayer that The one reputed to be a native Roman? Or the Egyp- most closely resembles the Paul VI consecration pref- tian one? The pope’s counselor? Or the anti-pope? The ace is not the sacramental form for conferring the epis- priest Hippolytus? Or a bishop? Or the martyr? Or one copacy, but a non-sacramental prayer for installing a of the several saints in the martyrology?37 Patriarch, who is usually already a bishop when he is The best we can manage is scholarly conjecture. appointed. (2) Origin? Where did The Apostolic Tradition come So, one cannot argue that the Paul VI form is valid from? Some say Rome; others say Alexandria, Egypt. because it is in use as a sacramental form “in two cer- More conjecture. tainly valid Eastern Rites.” (3) Age? How old is it? “Usually” dated around It is not among the words “accepted and used by 215 AD, but “the section dealing with ordination may the Church in that sense,” and there is no guarantee of have been retouched by fourth-century hands in order to validity on this basis. bring it into line with current doctrine and practice.”38 Note: “retouched.” More scholarly conjecture is needed to tell us which parts of the document were V. Another Approved Form? retouched. Manuscript Authority? Question: Was the new form employed as the sacra- (4) How much confidence mental form for conferring the episcopacy in some other rite can we put in the originals? Well, we don’t even have in the past that enjoyed at least tacit approval from the them: Church? “The Greek original of the document has not sur- Such evidence, though not as strong a proof for vived, except in the form of a few isolated fragments. validity as use in a Catholic Eastern Rite, would add at [I]t has to be reconstructed from an extant Latin trans- least some weight to the argument that the new form is lation and from later Coptic, Arabic and Ethiopic ver- valid. sions, as well as from the use made of it by compilers of later Church orders, which increases the difficulty of Above, we mentioned that the Paul VI Preface for 39 Episcopal Consecration was taken nearly verbatim determining exactly what the author wrote.” Hence, the subtitle of Dom Botte’s 1963 edition: An from an ancient prayer for consecrating a bishop that 40 appears in Dom Botte’s 1963 edition of The Apostolic Attempt at Reconstruction. At least a half-dozen other Tradition of St. Hippolytus. It also has parallels in other scholars (Connolly, Dix, Easton, Elfers, Lorentz, Hans- ancient texts such as The Apostolic Constitutions and the sens) have made similar attempts. Reconstruction, said Dom Botte, can “bring us Testament of the Lord. 41 Fr. Pierre-Marie also employed these texts as evi- back only to an archetype, and not the original.” dence to argue that the new rite is valid. So, we have only more conjecture, but this won’t How much certitude can we have that (1) these even get us the original. Liturgical Use? texts themselves were actual sacramental forms used (5) Does the text accurately reflect to confer the episcopacy, and (2) they received at least actual use? “It is not easy to distinguish what represents a real tacit approval from the Church as such — that even in 42 a broad sense they were “accepted and used by the usage from the ideal,” said Dom Botte in 1963. The Church in that sense”? Alas, if by “certitude,” we mean the certitude

Catholic moral theology requires for conferring or re- 37. La Liturgie d’Hippolyte: Ses Documents, Son Titutlaire, Ses Origines et Son ceiving a valid sacrament, our answer must be: None Charactere (Rome: Oriental Institute 1959), 249–340. 38. P. Bradshaw, Ordination Rites of the Ancient Churches of East and West at all. For we immediately descend into the mystifying (New York: Pueblo 1990), 3. world of scholarly debates over the authorship, origin, 39. Bradshaw, 3–4. My emphasis. 40. “Essai de Reconstituton.” 41. La Tradition…Essai, xxxiii-iv. 42. La Tradition…Essai, xiv. — 7 — prayers The Apostolic Tradition contains were given as “accepted and used by the Church in that sense,” so “models, and not as fixed formulas.”43 there is no guarantee of validity on this basis either. And finally, said Dom Botte, in the Apostolic Tradi- tion of Hippolytus, “Its origin, whether Roman or [Egyptian] is not really important here. Even if it is a VI. Power of the Episcopacy? Roman document, it should not be viewed as the Ro- man liturgy of the 3rd century, a time when the liturgy Question: Does the new sacramental form univocally left a great deal of room for a celebrant to impro- signify the sacramental effects — the power of Order (the 44 vise.” episcopacy) and the grace of the Holy Ghost? And so, multiple volumes of scholarly works pro- These are the criteria Pius XII laid down for the duce a model for an episcopal consecration prayer that sacramental form. Here again is the new form of Paul was not necessarily followed word-for-word anyway. VI to which we will apply them: This does not exactly build our confidence. “So now pour out upon this chosen one that power which is from you, the governing Spirit whom B. Apostolic Constitutions? you gave to your beloved Son, Jesus Christ, the Spirit An impressive title, to be sure. However, it is “a given by him to the holy apostles, who founded the composite revision” of three earlier Church orders. Church in every place to be your temple for the un- The Constitutions appears to have originated in ceasing glory and praise of your name.”47 Syria, “and is generally thought to be the work of an The form does seem to signify the grace of the Arian [heretic] who was to some extent composing an Holy Ghost. idiosyncratic idealization rather than always repro- But “governing Spirit”? Lutheran, Methodist and ducing exactly liturgical practice with which he was Mormon bishops also govern. Can such a term univo- familiar.”45 cally signify the power of Order conferred — the full- A composite dreamed up by a heretic? ness of the priesthood? The expression governing Spirit — Spiritus princi- C. Testament of Our Lord? palis in Latin — is at the heart of the dispute over the An even more impressive title! Alas, it “probably” validity of the new rite, for if it does not signify the dates from the 5th century and “seems” to have been fullness of the priesthood that constitutes the episco- composed in Syria. pacy, the sacrament is invalid. Moreover, “Although originally written in Greek, it is extant only in Syriac, Arabic and Ethiopic ver- A. Early Doubts about Validity sions. Like the Apostolic Constitutions, it is doubtful The casual reader will of course be tempted to how far it represents actual historical practice.”46 dismiss this as some crackpot traditionalist fever Doubtful historical practice? dream. But forty years ago, even before the new rite was promulgated, a member of the study group that D. No Proof of Approved Use. created the new rite of episcopal consecration raised just this issue. The question that began this section was: Was the In an October 14, 1966 memo, Bishop Juan Hervás new form employed as the sacramental form for conferring y Benet (1905-1982), the Ordinary of Ciudad Real the episcopacy in some other rite in the past that enjoyed at (Spain) and a promoter of Opus Dei, wrote to fellow least tacit approval from the Church? study group members: Our answer: We have absolutely no idea, because: “It would be necessary to establish undeniably • We have no definitive original texts. that the new form better and more perfectly signifies • We have “reconstructed” texts based on nothing the sacramental action and its effect. That is to say, more than the authority of scholarly theories about that it should be established in no uncertain terms that it which readings were correct. contains no ambiguity, and that it omits nothing from • We do not know whether these texts were actu- among the principal charges which are proper to the ally used to consecrate bishops. episcopal order.… A doubt occurs to me concerning the • We have no record of Church approval. words ‘Spiritus principalis’; do these words adequately sig- So, one cannot argue on the basis of these texts nify the sacrament?”48 that the Paul VI form is valid. None of them have been

47. ICEL translation. “Et nunc effunde super hunc Electum eam virtutem, quae a te est, Spiritum principalem, quem dedisti dilecto Filio Tuo Jesu 43. La Tradition…Essai, xvi Christo, quem Ipse donavit sanctis Apostolis, qui constituerunt Ecclesiam per 44. Louvain conference notes, July 1961, “Le Rituel d’Ordination dans la singula loca, ut sanctuarium tuum, in gloriam et laudem indeficientem ‘Tradition Apostolique’ d’Hippolyte,” Bulletin du Comité 36 (1962), 5. nominis tui. 45. Bradshaw, 4. 48. German Liturgical Institute (Trier), Kleinheyer file, B 117; cited Pierre- 46. Bradshaw, 4–5. Marie, “Why the New Rite…” (Jan 2005), 15. My emphasis. — 8 — Whether he received an answer is not recorded. • But what did the Greek word hegemonicos and its But consider what the bishop’s question implied at the Latin equivalent principalis mean in the Christian vo- time for anyone with serious theological training: Will cabulary of the 3rd century? introducing this expression in the form expose the sac- • It meant this: Each of the three Holy Orders has rament to the risk of invalidity? a gift of the Holy Ghost, but not the same for each. After Paul VI promulgated the new rite for Holy Deacons = “spirit of zeal and solicitude,” priests = Orders in June 1968, it had to be translated into vari- “spirit of counsel.” ous modern languages. The expression Spiritus princi- • Bishops have the “spirit of authority.” palis immediately caused problems. The first official • The bishop is both leader who must govern and English translation rendered it as “excellent Spirit”; high priest of the sanctuary. He is the ruler of the French, as “the Spirit that makes chiefs” or “leaders”; Church. So the word hegemonicos/principalis is under- German, as “the spirit of a guide.” standable. These expressions probably led some of the more • Spiritus principalis therefore means the “gift of conservative bishops at the time to fear for the apos- the Spirit proper to a leader.”51 tolic succession, because Rome suddenly issued two After this statement appeared, various vernacular declarations on the translation of sacramental forms translations were adjusted, and the official English within three months (October 1973 and January 1974).49 translation became governing Spirit. The latter declaration from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, moreover, was reprinted in C. … or Governing Spirit = Who Knows? Notitiae (the official publication of the Congregation So, it was a very erudite-sounding explanation. for Divine Worship), accompanied by a rather strange Unfortunately, it was false — a typical case of the bra- commentary. The author, a Dominican, specifically zen double-talk modernists excel at when they are mentioned Pius XII’s 1947 Constitution Sacramentum caught out. Spiritus principalis can mean many things, Ordinis, the “substance of the sacraments,” how each but the “power of Order” proper to the episcopacy new sacramental formula “continues to signify the isn’t one of them. special grace conferred by the sacrament,” and the This becomes clear after a brief survey of what need to “preserve the validity of the sacramental governing Spirit can signify, in either its Latin form 50 rite.” (Spiritus principalis) or its interchangeable Greek form A coincidence? In the same issue of Notitiae, about (hegemonicos). a dozen pages later, we come across a short article by (1) Dictionaries. Latin and Greek dictionaries Dom Bernard Botte OSB explaining the meaning of — render the adjective governing as, respectively, “Origi- surprise! — Spiritus principalis. nally existing, basic, primary… first in importance or Clearly, this Latin expression had a lot of people esteem, chief… befitting leading men or princes,”52 worried. and “of a leader, leading, governing” or “guiding.”53 There is a related noun, hegemonia, which in general B. Governing Spirit = Episcopacy?… means “authority, command,” and in a secondary Dom Botte’s explanation of Spiritus principalis was sense means “rule, office of a superior: episcopal… of essentially as follows: a superior of a convent… hence of sphere of bishop’s • The expression “raised several difficulties” and rule, diocese.”54 led to various translations. But even in this sense, it does not connote the • It occurs in Psalm 50:14, but its meaning there is power of Order (potestas Ordinis), just jurisdiction not necessarily linked to what the expression in the (potestas jurisdictionis), especially since the definition consecration prayer meant for the 3rd-century Chris- mentions a monastic superior. tian. (2) Psalm 50. In ecclesiastical Latin or Greek, the • “Spirit” designates the Holy Ghost. first text usually cited for governing is King David’s prayer in Ps 50:14, where it is used with spirit. The ex- pression is translated into English as a perfect spirit,

49. SC Divine Worship, Circular Letter Dum Toto Terrarum, 25 October 1973, AAS 66 (1974) 98–9; SC Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Instauratio Liturgica, 25 January 1974, AAS 66 (1974), 661. The second document explained that when the Holy See approves a translation, it judges that it “rightly expresses 51. B. Botte, “’Spiritus Principalis’ Formule de l’Ordination Épiscopale,” the meaning intended by the Church,” but that it also stipulates that the Notitiae 10 (1974), 410–1. “c’est le don de l’Esprit qui convient à un chef.” translation “is to be understood in accord with the mind of the Church as 52. P. Glare, Oxford Latin Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon 1994). Similarly: A. expressed by the original Latin text.” This statement is bizarre. A translation Forcellini, Lexicon Totius Latinitatis (Padua: 1940); A. Souter, Glossary of Later either conveys the substantial meaning of the Latin or it does not. If the latter, Latin to 600 AD (Oxford: Clarendon 1949); C. Lewis & C. Short, A New Latin it is invalid no matter what anyone “stipulates” — except Humpty Dumpty in Dictionary (New York: 1907). Through the Looking Glass: 'When I use a word… 'it means just what I choose it 53. G. Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon 2000). F. Gingrich to mean — neither more nor less.” & F. Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early 50. B. Douroux, “Commentarium,” Notitiae 10 (1974), 394-5. “purché la nuova Christian Literature (Chicago: University Press 1957). formula continui a significare la grazia speciale conferita dal sacramento.” 54. Lampe, 599. — 9 — which commentators explain as “a ‘generous’ or noble (7) Another Expert. And in 1969, before it became spirit.”55 a matter of controversy, we find at least one expert Despite Dom Botte’s claim that the meaning of who said that omitting the expression governing Spirit governing Spirit in the Psalm was unrelated to its sup- wouldn’t even necessarily alter the validity of the rite: posed 3rd century meaning in the prayer for episcopal “If one were to omit inadvertently the words spiri- consecration, a Greek patristic dictionary directly links tum principalem, I don’t see what that would change.” both passages and even quotes the Greek excerpt from The expert? Dom Bernard Botte. 65 Hippolytus.56 (8) Who Knows? Our brief survey, then, uncov- (3) Church Fathers. They construe governing ered a dozen possible meanings for governing Spirit: Spirit in various ways, as referring to the Father,57 the • Originally existing spirit. Holy Ghost,58 the virtue of fortitude,59 a mighty power • Leading/guiding spirit. that strengthens against temptations,60 etc. • Perfect spirit like King David. (4) A Dogmatic Treatise. In his work on the Trin- • Generous or noble spirit. ity Msgr. Pohle says that governing Spirit in the Psalm • God the Father. does not mean the Holy Ghost Itself, but nothing more • God the Holy Ghost. than an “external divine effect,” a “supernatural spirit • An external divine effect. of rectitude and self-control, i.e., a good disposition.”61 • Supernatural spirit of rectitude/self control. (5) A 1962 Commentary on Hippolytus. The an- • Good disposition. cient prayer for episcopal consecration, says Roger • For a Coptic abbot: gentleness, love, patience and Beraudy, presents the bishop as both leader and high graciousness. priest successively. Governing Spirit appears in the • For a Coptic archbishop: divine knowledge, re- section of the prayer that presents the bishop as ceived through the Church. “leader of the Church,” rather than in the following • Some quality whose omission wouldn’t change section that Beraudy identifies as presenting “the validity anyway. bishop as high priest.”62 None of these specifically signify either the episco- (6) Non-Sacramental Ceremonies. The Coptic pacy in general or the fullness of Holy Orders that a Rite, apart from its sacramental prayer for episcopal bishop possesses. consecration, also employs the expression governing Spirit in two non-sacramental ceremonies. D. Univocally Signify the Effect? a. In the Coptic Church, as in the Catholic Church, We now begin to apply a few more of our criteria an abbot is not a bishop, but merely a simple priest from section I. who is the head of a monastery. When a Coptic abbot Pius XII, in his Apostolic Constitution Sacramen- (hegoumenos) is installed, the bishop imposes his tum Ordinis declared that the form for Holy Orders hand on the priest’s head and says a prayer that God must “univocally signify the sacramental effects — will grant the priest “a governing Spirit of gentleness that is, the power of the Order and the grace of the 63 and love and patience and graciousness.” Holy Ghost.”66 b. For the promotion of a Coptic bishop to the rank The new form fails on two of these points. of archbishop (metropolitan), in which it is prayed that (1) Not Univocal. The expression governing Spirit God pour forth his governing Spirit, “the knowledge is not univocal — that is, it is not a term that signifies which is Thine, which he hath received in Thy holy only one thing,67 as Pius XII required. 64 Church.” Rather, as we demonstrated above, the expression is ambiguous — capable of signifying many different 55. B. Orchard ed., A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture (London: Nelson 1953). 457. things and persons. 56. Lampe, 599. “Ps 50:14: cf. Hipp.trad.ap.3.3”; We do, among its various meanings, find one 57. Origen, In Jer Hom. 8, PG 13:336. “Τινα τα τρια πνευµατα ταυτα; Το ηγεµονικον ο Πατηρ.” meaning connoting the Holy Ghost — but not in a 58. Origen, Comm. In Ep. Ad Rom. 7, PG 14:1103. “sed in his principatum et sense exclusively limited to bishops. Coptic abbots, dominationem hunc Spiritum sanctum, qui et principalis appelatur, tenere.” Cyril of Alexandria, Dubia de Trinitate 9, PG 77:1140. King David, and virtuous leaders can all receive this “το του Θεου Πνευµα, το ευθεs, το ηγεµονικον.” Basil the Great, Adv. governing Spirit. Eunomium 5.3, PG 29:753. “το Πνευµα … και ηγεµονικον.” 59. Cyril of Alexandria, Expl. In Psalmos 50:14, PG 69:1100-1. “τωι ηγεµονικωι Πνευµατι, οπερ εστιν η δια του αγιου Πνευµατοs ευανδρια.” 60. Athanasius. Ep. Ad Amunem Mon., PG 26:1176. 65. B. Botte, “L’Ordination…” 123. “mais si on ommetait par inadvertance les “Και Πνευµατι ηγεµονικωι … ισχυρα τιs παρα σου δυναµιs.” mots ‘spiritum principalem’ je ne vois pas ce que cela changerait.” Botte, a typi- 61. J. Pohle, The Divine Trinity: A Dogmatic Treatise, 2nd ed. (St. Louis: Herder cal modernist, devotes two pages of this article to dismissing the standard 1915), 97. safeguards for the validity of an episcopal consecration that had been intro- 62. R. Beraudy, “Le Sacrement de l’Ordre d’après la Tradition Apostolique duced based on the principles of moral and dogmatic theology. d’Hippolyte,” Bulletin du Comité 36 (1962), 341, 342. 66. Sacr. Ord. DZ 2301. ¶4. “quibus univoce significantur effectus sacramen- 63. Tr. Burmester, Ordination Rites…Coptic,” 97. “hegemonicon pneuma.” tales — scilicet potestas Ordinis et gratia Spiritus Sancti.” Also RO 2:17. “spiritum hegemonicum.” 67. Forcellini, Lexicon 8:869. “proprie de eo qui unius est vocis… cui mul- 64. Tr. Burmester, Ordination Rites…Coptic,” 118. “hegemonicon pneuma. tivocus vel plurivocus opponitur.… ‘Univoca (sunt) quae sub eodem nomine et Also RO 2:34. “in spiritu tuo hegemonico. sub eadem substantia continentur.’” — 10 — (2) No Power of Order. Among these many dif- VIII. An Invalid Sacrament ferent meanings, however, we do not find the power of Order (potestas Ordinis) of the episcopacy. The ex- Question: How does this substantial change of pression governing Spirit does not even equivocally con- meaning in the form affect the validity of the sacrament? note the Sacrament of Holy Orders in any sense. A substantial change in the meaning of a sacra- Still less does it connote what the theologians who mental form, as we have seen in section I, renders a advised Pius XII said the sacramental form for confer- sacrament invalid. ring the episcopate must express: the “fullness of the This leads us inexorably to our conclusion: priesthood of Christ in the episcopal office and order” Accordingly, an episcopal consecration con- or the “’fullness or totality’ of the priestly ministry.”68 ferred with the form promulgated by Paul VI in One of the constituent elements for a form capable 1968 is invalid. of conferring the order is therefore absent. We proceed to two objections. So, we have an answer to the question with which we began this section: Does the new sacramental form univocally signify the IX. Saved by Context? sacramental effects — the power of Order (the episcopacy) Objection: Even if the essential part of the sacrament and the grace of the Holy Ghost? were insufficiently determined, it would nevertheless be The answer is no. adequately specified by the phrase “grant… that he show forth to Thee a high priesthood without blame”71 that occurs VII. Substantial Change? later in the context. Fr. Pierre-Marie briefly raised this objection.72 But Question: Is this a substantial change in the sacra- one could make such an argument only if: mental form for conferring the Order of episcopacy? (1) The new sacramental form contained both A substantial change, as we saw in section I, oc- elements required by Pius XII (the grace of the Holy curs in a sacramental form “when the meaning of the Ghost and the power of the Order), and form itself is corrupted,” if the words “would have a (2) The form signified one of those elements meaning different from that intended by the equivocally rather than univocally. Church,”69 if it no longer “completely and congru- One could then at least argue that the form indeed ently” expresses the meaning intended or willed by contained the element that Pius XII required and that Christ.70 the context adequately specified it. Now for Holy Orders, Pius XII told us exactly what However: elements a sacramental form ought to express — the grace of the Holy Ghost and the power of the Order A. Certitude… or Opinion? being conferred. No matter how convincingly formulated, such an The term governing Spirit in the new form for epis- argument could never produce moral certitude that the copal consecration promulgated by Paul VI may ex- new sacramental form was valid, only a probable opin- press the first of those elements, the Holy Ghost. In- ion that it was. For the weighty counter-argument deed, the pronoun beginning the clause that follows it would always be that Pius XII required that the form — “whom [quem] you gave…” — clearly indicates it is be univocal, period. supposed to refer to the Holy Ghost. It is not permissible in the administration and re- That same expression, governing Spirit, however, ception of sacraments to follow a mere probable does not and cannot express the other required element opinion about validity. To do so is a mortal sin against – the power of the Order being conferred. That notion religion, charity and (for the minister) against justice.73 is entirely missing from the new sacramental form, Further, this would hold all the more true re- which no longer adequately signifies what it is sup- garding the administration of Holy Orders, because of posed to effect — the fullness of the priesthood that the irreparable harm — invalid Masses, absolutions constitutes the episcopal order. and Last Rites — that would result from its invalidity. So, our question was: Is this a substantial change in One could therefore neither confer nor receive Or- the sacramental form for conferring the Order of episco- ders based on an opinion that the new rite of episcopal pacy? consecration is valid, nor function as a priest based on The answer is yes. such an opinion.

68. F. Hürth, “Commentarius ad Cons. Apostolicam Sacramentum Ordinis,” Periodica 37 (1948), 31–2. “plenitudinem sacerdotii Christi in munere et ordine 71. De Ordinatione Episcopi, Presbyterorum et Diaconorum, ed. typ. alt. (Rome: episcopali.” “’summa seu totalitas’ ministerii sacerdotalis.” Polyglot 1990), 25. “Da… ut… summum sacerdotium tibi exhibeat sine repre- 69. Merkelbach, 3:20. hensione.” 70. Coronata, 1:13. “non amplius per ipsam complete et congruenter expri- 72. “Why the New Rite…” (Jan 2005), 10. matur.” 73. Cappello 1:25–6. — 11 — form valid. An essential element was missing from the B. A Counter-Argument form, so there is nothing – not even an equivocal term And the argument from context, in any case, cuts — for the context somehow to render specific. both ways. So too, here. The power of Order is gone from the Other reconstructions of the episcopal consecra- form, and context cannot bring it back. tion prayer in the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus All that remains is governing Spirit, which may re- contain a petition to God that the bishop would re- fer to the Holy Ghost, or one of His effects, or the Fa- ceive “the power… to confer orders according to your ther, or knowledge, or Coptic abbot-like virtues. bidding.”74 The Paul VI Consecration Preface at this point in- X. Approved by the Pope? stead asks that he receive the power to “distribute gifts (or offices) according to Thy command.”75 The official Objection: Even if the essential sacramental form did English translation renders it as “assign ministries as not univocally signify one of the sacramental effects (the you have decreed.” power of the Order of the episcopacy), approval by Pope A Mormon bishop with his own governing Spirit Paul VI would nevertheless guarantee that the form was can assign ministries, and even Santa Claus can dis- valid. tribute gifts. This is the last and weakest argument for validity, The notion of conferring Holy Orders — the dis- not only because it assumes that authoritative decla- tinctive power that characterizes the fullness of the rations in the Church need no coherent theological priesthood — has been eliminated from the new Pref- justification,78 but also because it wrongly attributes to ace. the pope a power he does not possess. That the omission was deliberate is clear from the Coptic Rite form for episcopal consecration that Dom A. No Power to Change? Botte consulted to reconstruct the text of Hippolytus. In the beginning of Sacramentum Ordinis, Pius XII, It further specifies after the foregoing phrase that the reiterating the teaching of the Council of Trent, states: bishop is to provide clergy “for the priesthood… to make “the Church has no power over ‘the substance of the 76 new houses of prayer, and to consecrate altars.” Sacraments,’ that is, over those things which, as is The removal of the power to ordain from the An- proved from the sources of divine revelation, Christ glican form for episcopal consecration was among the the Lord Himself established to be kept as sacramental reasons adduced by Leo XIII for declaring Anglican signs.”79 orders invalid, “because among the first duties of the As regards Holy Orders, “The Church possesses episcopacy is that of ordaining ministers for the Holy no power over the meaning of the form, because it 77 Eucharist and sacrifice.” pertains to the substance of the sacrament instituted by Christ.”80 Christ Himself prescribed that for Holy C. Not Just Equivocal, but GONE Orders the Church use signs and words “capable of However, one may not even make the argument expressing… the power of Order.”81 from context in favor of validity, because the new The new form for episcopal consecration does not form does not even equivocally signify one of the express this power, even equivocally. It therefore elements Pius XII said the sacramental form must changes the substance of a sacrament as established by contain — the power of the Order being conferred. Christ. No pope would have the power to render such That element is missing, so there is nothing for a form valid. the context to determine or specify. Trying to do so is a futile effort. B. Or a Change Means No Power? If I recite all the prayers and perform all the cere- If faith tells us that the Church has no power to monies that the Rituale Romanum prescribes for a bap- change the substance of a sacrament, and we conclude tism, yet — God forbid — omit the word “baptize” when I pour the water on a baby’s head, the sacrament 78. Nothing could be further from the truth. The theologians who prepared is invalid. All the prayers in the surrounding context — Pius XII’s 1947 declaration on the matter and form for Holy Orders studied no matter how much they speak about baptism, the question for 40 years, and took great pains to insure that rigorous theo- logical reasoning consistent with tradition supported every word of the draft. cleansing, and the life of grace — cannot render the When it appeared, the head of the commission wrote a 50-page commentary to demonstrate this. 79. DZ 3201. “Ecclesia nulla competat potestas in ‘substantia Sacramento- rum,’ id est in ea quae, testibus divinae revelationis fontibus, ipse Christus 74. Bradshaw, 107. Dominus in signo sacramentali servanda statuit.” 75. De Ord. Ep., 25. “ut distribuat munera secundum praeceptum tuum.” 80. Merkelbach 3:720. “Quantum ad sensum formae, quia pertinet ad sub- 76. Burmester, Ordination Rites, 111. stantiam sacramenti a Christo instituta, Ecclesiae nulla competit potestas.” 77. Apostolicae Curae, 13 Sep 1896, DZ 1965. “eoque id magis, quia in primis 81. Merkelbach 3:18. “determinavit… quod ab Ecclesia adhiberentur signa et episcopatus muniis scilicet est, ministros ordinandi in sanctam Eucharistiam verba idonea ad exprimendum characterem et gratiam propriam Confirma- et sacrificium.” tionis, vel potestatem Ordinis.” — 12 — that Paul VI has in fact changed the substance of a sac- the Paul VI form is “in use in two certainly valid East- rament — rendering it invalid in the process — we can ern Rites” and therefore valid. arrive at but one conclusion: He was not a true pope. (3) Various ancient texts (Hippolytus, the Apostolic The invalid Rite of Episcopal Consecration Paul VI Constitutions, the Testament of Our Lord) which share promulgated, then, is just one more piece of evidence some common elements with the Paul VI consecration confirming the defection from the faith and resultant Preface have been “reconstructed,” are of doubtful loss of authority by the Popes of Vatican II. provenance, may not represent actual liturgical use, That the man who occupies the See of Rome is not etc. There is no evidence that they were “accepted and a true bishop, moreover, should be ample proof that used by the Church as such.” Thus they provide no neither is he a true pope. reliable evidence to support for the validity of the Paul VI form. XI. Summary (4) The key problem in the new form revolves around the term governing Spirit (Spiritus principalis in WE HAVE COVERED a vast amount of material in the Latin). Before and after the promulgation of the 1968 foregoing sections, so we will now offer the belea- Rite of Episcopal Consecration the meaning of this guered reader a summary. expression provoked concerns about whether it suffi- ciently signified the sacrament. A. General Principles (5) Dom Bernard Botte, the principal creator of the new rite, maintained that, for the 3rd-century Christian, (1) Each sacrament has a form (essential formula) governing Spirit connoted the episcopacy, because that produces its sacramental effect. When a substantial bishops have “the spirit of authority” as “rulers of the change of meaning is introduced into the sacramental Church.” Spiritus principalis means “the gift of a Spirit form through the corruption or omission of essential proper to a leader.” words, the sacrament becomes invalid (=does not (6) This explanation is false and disingenuous. Ref- “work,” or produce the sacramental effect). erence to dictionaries, a Scripture commentary, the (2) Sacramental forms approved for use in the East- Fathers of the Church, a dogmatic treatise, and Eastern ern Rites of the Catholic Church are sometimes differ- Rite non-sacramental investiture ceremonies reveals ent in wording from the Latin Rite forms. Neverthe- that, among a dozen different and sometimes contra- less, they are the same in substance, and are valid. dictory meanings, governing Spirit does not specifically (3) Pius XII declared that the form for Holy Orders signify either the episcopacy in general or the fullness (i.e., for diaconate, priesthood and episcopacy) must of Holy Orders that the bishop possesses. univocally (=unambiguously) signify the sacramental (7) Before the controversy over it arose, Dom Botte effects — the power of Order and the grace of the himself even said that he didn’t see how omitting the Holy Ghost. expression governing Spirit would change the validity (4) For conferring the episcopacy, Pius XII desig- of the rite of consecration. nated as the sacramental form a sentence in the tradi- (8) The new form fails to meet two criteria for the tional Rite of Episcopal Consecration that unequivo- form for Holy Orders laid down by Pius XII. (a) Be- cally expresses the power of the order that a bishop cause the term governing Spirit is capable of signifying receives and the grace of the Holy Ghost. many different things and persons, it does not univo- cally signify the sacramental effect. (b) It lacks any term B. Application to the New Form that even equivocally connotes the power of Order that a (1) The new form for episcopal consecration that bishop possess — the “fullness of the priesthood of Paul VI promulgated does not seem to specify the Christ in the episcopal office and order,” or “the full- power of the Order supposedly being conferred. Can ness or totality of the priestly ministry.” it confer the episcopacy? To answer this question, we (9) For these reasons, the new form constitutes a apply the foregoing principles. substantial change in the meaning of the sacramental (2) The short Paul VI form for episcopal consecra- form for conferring the episcopacy. tion is not identical to the lengthy Eastern Rite forms, (10) A substantial change in the meaning of a sac- and unlike them, does not mention sacramental pow- ramental form, as we have already demonstrated, ren- ers proper to a bishop alone (e.g., ordaining). The ders a sacrament invalid. Eastern Rite prayers that the surrounding Paul VI con- secration Preface most closely resembles are non- C. Conclusion: An Invalid Sacrament sacramental prayers for the installations of the Accordingly, for all the foregoing reasons, an epis- Maronite and Syrian Patriarchs, who are already bish- copal consecration conferred with the sacramental ops when appointed. In sum, one may not argue that form promulgated by Paul VI in 1968 is invalid.

— 13 — * * * * * Mass with full approval and recognition from the WHEN I WAS a seminarian in the Midwest during the modernist hierarchy — the Fraternity of St. Peter, the late 1960s and early 1970s, I heard various modernists Institute of Christ the King, the Apostolic Administra- dismiss the traditional understanding of apostolic suc- tion of St John Vianney, the Fogambault Benedictines, cession as “pipeline theology,” un-Scriptural myth and etc. after-the-fact “faith reflection,” and mock the notion of While giving an impression of splendidly main- sacramental forms as “magic words” and “mumbo- taining integral Catholicism, these institutions are jumbo.” completely compromised. Their members must adhere During that same post-Vatican II era, modernist fully to the errors of Vatican II and must cooperate liturgical “experts” were hard at work fashioning the with the modernist diocesan bishops and clergy. new rite of episcopal consecration. Having now read Young men attracted to the glories of Catholicism much of what they wrote — filled as it is with bogus and the ideals of the priesthood enter these seminaries claims of a “return to sources,” crafty double-talk, and monasteries to be ordained one day in the full contempt for scholastic sacramental theology, and the traditional, pre-Vatican II ceremony. stink of arrogance that rises from every page — I have But they will exit that ceremony afterwards every no difficulty at all believing that these men set out to bit the laymen who entered the seminary years before produce a rite that would destroy the apostolic succes- — for the bishop who ordained them will have pos- sion as it was traditionally understood.82 sessed not the fullness of the priesthood, but the emp- As we have seen, they have succeeded all too well. tiness of the governing Spirit. The eradication of sacramental apostolic succession is And as for the superiors of SSPX, their attempt to their little “joke” on the Church. purchase a side chapel in Ratzinger’s One-World So, the modernists need mock the “pipeline” no Ecumenical Church by defending his counterfeit epis- longer. They cut it off in 1968. The bishops consecrated copacy betrays the clergy, the faithful and the founder with this new rite do not possess the sacramental of the Society. power of true bishops, and cannot validly consecrate For despite the Society’s incoherent and danger- other bishops or ordain true priests. ous teachings on the pope and the universal ordinary The priests who derive their ordination from such magisterium, one could at least take some consolation bishops cannot, in turn, validly confect the Eucharist that it stood for the validity of the sacraments. at Mass, forgive sins or anoint the dying. This is a sin If the new line enunciated in Fr. Pierre-Marie’s ar- against the virtues of religion, justice and charity. The ticle prevails, however, that will be gone. And should priests who in good faith receive invalid orders are a “reconciliation” occur, it will then only be a matter of deprived of the priestly character, and the laymen time before counterfeit clergy start surfacing through- who receive invalid sacraments at their hands are de- out the SSPX’s apostolate — courtesy, perhaps, of a prived of grace. cardinal or even the “Bishop” of Rome himself, intent It would be bad enough if this phenomenon of in- on making a gesture of his ecumenical good will. valid sacraments were limited exclusively to parishes Who, then, in the ranks of SSPX will have the and clergy that fully embrace the Vatican II changes, courage to resist? Who, then, will thunder like Arch- but it has spread to circles where the traditional Latin bishop Lefebvre against these “bastard rites,” these Mass is offered as well. “bastard priests,” these “bastard sacraments,” which Since 1984 diocesan-approved “Indult” traditional may no longer give grace at all?83 Masses have sprung up everywhere, offered by priests And the traditionalist laity, betrayed by the com- ordained by bishops consecrated with the new rite. promise of his sons, will once again wonder whether These Masses are all invalid, but many innocent their sacraments are but an empty show — absolutely Catholics who do not know better attend them, ador- null and utterly void. ing and receiving only bread. Even more dangerous are the various clerical and March 25, 2006 Abp. Lefebvre † religious institutes that now offer the traditional Latin 15th anniv.

82. Dom Botte knew, for instance, that the West Syrian prayer for the conse- cration of the Patriarch was non-sacramental — that the title means “investi- ture ceremony,” rather than sacramental consecration, because “the Patriarch does not receive a charism different from the one he received at the time he became a bishop.” Khouris-Sarkis, 140-1, 156–7. He knew because he was a contributing editor for L’Orient Syrien, the periodical in which those words appeared. He also knew, because he himself wrote an article about it, that the true ancient sacramental form for conferring the episcopacy in the Syrian and Coptic rites was not “Hippolytus” but the formula “Divine Grace…” still used 83. Sermon, Lille (France), 29 August 1976. In M. Davies, Apologia pro Marcel by the Byzantine Rite. “La grâce divine, sous la forme que nous trouvons dans Lefebvre (Dickinson TX: Angelus Press 1979) 1:262–3. “The rite of the [new] l’eucologe byzantin, est la formule sacramentelle la plus ancienne dans le Mass is a bastard rite, the sacraments are bastard sacraments — we no longer patriarchat syrien.” Botte, “La Formule d’Ordination,” L’Orient Syrien 2 (1957), know if they are sacraments which give grace or do not give grace… The 295. priests coming out of the seminaries are bastard priests.” — 14 — Appendix 1 Preface as “to distribute gifts.”93 This change should have set off alarms but didn’t, because Fr. Pierre-Marie employed an Two Notes on Fr. Pierre-Marie’s Article. unreliable translation. A. Invalidly-Consecrated Doctors? Fr. Pierre-Marie argues In sum, Fr. Pierre-Marie presents in his tables three dis- that by attacking the validity of the new rite, one also im- puted ancient texts (Botte’s “reconstructed” Hippolytus, the plicitly attacks the ordinations and consecrations of various Constitutions and the Testament), a non-sacramental installa- Eastern Doctors of the Church84 — his assumption being that tion rite (for the Maronite Patriarch) and an unreliable form for Holy Orders in Alexandria and Antioch was more translation (Denzinger/Scholz’s Latin) that omits a key or less the same as the rite of Paul VI. phrase (ordaining priests) from the Coptic sacramental form. Dom Botte himself, however, demonstrated that the true None of this, obviously, supports the validity of the new ancient sacramental form for conferring the Holy Orders in rite. these rites was not “Hippolytus,” but the formula “Divine Appendix 2 85 Grace…” still used by the Byzantine Rite. A Note on Copts

th B. Comparison Tables. Fr. Pierre-Marie presents three im- After the 7 -century Moslem conquest of North Africa, pressive-looking tables of parallel Latin texts. With these he the Copts went into a long decline. 94 intends to demonstrate that the new Paul VI text for the con- Ill-educated candidates obtained the Patriarchate, 95 secration of bishops is fundamentally the same as texts for sometimes by bribes. Formation of the secular clergy was 96 97 episcopal consecration used either in the Eastern Rites or the null, and the monasteries were little better. ancient Church, and is therefore valid. Here are a few notes about the Copts’ sacramental prac- But comparison tables are only as good as the texts se- tice: lected, and the ones Fr. Pierre-Marie has chosen are quite • If a dying baby could not be brought to the church for useless for his argument. baptism, the priests would merely anoint it, bless it and re- His base text for comparison is the Latin version of the cite the exorcisms, because Coptic sacramental law said any 98 1968 Preface for Episcopal Consecration, composed, of of these ceremonies replaced baptism. th th course by Dom Botte. Fr. Pierre-Marie provides us with the • In the 12 -13 century, there was a serious attempt to following texts to compare to it: abolish auricular confession entirely, replacing it with a sort 99 (1)Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus. This is Dom Botte’s of general absolution at Mass. 1963 “reconstruction.” Its inclusion in a comparison table, • The Coptic bishop in charge of Ethiopia would ordain however, proves nothing about the validity of the 1968 form thousands of Africans to the priesthood at one time, some of 100 — just that Dom Botte could type the same text twice. them stark naked for the ceremony. (2) The Apostolic Constitutions. This text is thought to be • Because of the way some Coptic priests conducted the work of an Arian heretic, is a composite, and may not baptisms, there was reason to doubt their validity, so the represent actual liturgical practice.86 Not a great proof for Holy Office decreed in 1885 that an inquiry should be made 101 validity. in each case when a Copt converted. (3) Testament of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is doubtful how That the modernists would scrap the venerable Roman far this represents actual historical practice.87 Again, not a Preface for Episcopal Consecration in favor of a liturgical great proof for validity either. text connected with this decadent schismatic and heretical (4) Consecration of the Maronite Patriarch. This text is not sect is an everlasting indictment of their insufferable arro- the Maronite sacramental form for conferring episcopal con- gance and folly. secration but a non-sacramental installation prayer for the Patriarch, who is already a bishop.88 Bibliography (5) Coptic Rite of Episcopal Consecration. Here Fr. Pierre- Acta Apostolicae Sedis. Periodical. Rome. 1909–. (“AAS”) Marie at least provides a text based upon a form for episco- ADAM, ADOLF. Foundations of Liturgy: An Introduction to Its History pal consecration that is recognized as valid. Unfortunately: and Practice. Collegeville MN: Liturgical Press 1992. (a) He has taken his Latin translation from Denzinger’s ATTWATER, DONALD. Christian Churches of the East: Churches in Com- Ritus Orientalium,89 which in the case of the Coptic texts was munion with Rome and Churches Separated from Rome. Milwaukee: based on another Latin version “filled throughout with mis- Bruce 1961. 2 vols. translations,”90 and therefore “should be treated with cau- BERAUDY, R. “Le Sacrement de l’Ordre d’après la Tradition Apos- tion.”91 tolique d’Hippolyte,” Bulletin du Comité des Études 36 (1962). 338–356. (b) This version mistranslates a phrase specifying the BOTTE, BERNARD, OSB. “Christian People and Hierarchy in the Ap- bishop’s power “to provide clergy according to [Our Lord’s] ostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus,” in Roles in the Liturgical As- 92 commandment for the priesthood.” Dom Botte blurred this sembly, trans. by Matthew J. O’Connell. New York: Pueblo 1981. phrase in his 1963 reconstruction of Hippolytus as “to dis- 61–72. tribute portions,” and in the 1968 episcopal consecration —————. “La Formule d’Ordination ‘la Grâce Divine’ dans les Rites Orientaux,” L’Orient Syrien 2 (1957). 283–96. —————. From Silence to Participation: An Insider’s View of Liturgi-

84. “Why the New Rite,” The Angelus, January 2006, 4. 85. See B. Botte, “La Formule d’Ordination,” L’Orient Syrien 2 (1957), 295. 93. “distribuat munera,” “dare sortes.” Botte also scrapped completely the 86. See article, section V.B. phrases that mentioned consecrating churches and altars. 87. See article, section V.C, 94. M. Jugie, “Monophysite (Église Copte)” DTC 10:2260. “Remarquons, à ce 88. See article, section IV.C. propos, que les patriarche coptes n’ont jamais brillé pour leur science; on en a 89. RO 2:23ff. vu de fort ignorants, et nous avons donné plus haut le nom d’un illtetré.” 90. Emmanuel. Lanne, “Les Ordinations dans le Rite Copte,” L’Orient Syrien 5 95. Jugie DTC 10:2262. (1960), 90–1. “Denzinger se base sur une version faite par Scholz… La traduc- 96 . Jugie DTC 10:2263. tion de Scholz contient des gros contresens.” 97. Jugie DTC 10:2262. 91. Bradshaw, 8. 98. Jugie DTC 10:2281/ 92. Trans. Burmester, Ordination Rites, 110-1. RO 2:24 renders the Coptic as 99. Jugie DTC 10:2285–6. “constitutendi cleros secundum mandatum ejus ad sanctuarium.” The foot- 100. A. Fortescue, The Lesser Eastern Churches (London: CTS 1913), 311. note reads: “in ordine sacerdotali.” 101. D. Attwater, Christian Churches of the East (Milwaukee: Bruce 1961) 2:191. — 15 — cal Renewal. Washington: Pastoral 1988. HÜRTH, F., SJ. “Commentarius ad Cons. Apostolicam Sacramentum —————. Louvain conference notes, July 1961. “Le Rituel Ordinis,” Periodica 37 (1948). 9–56. d’Ordination dans la ‘Tradition Apostolique’ d’Hippolyte,” Bulle- KHOURIS-SARKIS, G. “Le Rituel du Sacre des Éveques et des Patriar- tin du Comité des Études 36 (1962). 5–18. ches dans l’Église Syrienne d’Antioch: Introduction,” L’Orient —————. “Holy Orders in the Ordination Prayers,” in Roquette, Syrien 8 (1963). 137-164. R., ed., 3–29. JUGIE, MARTIN. “Monophysite (Église Copte),” in DTC 10:2251–2306. —————. “L’Ordination de l’Évêque,” La Maison-Dieu 97 (1969). —————. Theologia Dogmatica Christianorum Dissidentium: De The- 111–126. ologia Dogmatica Nestorianorum et Monophysitarum, vol. 5. Paris: [————–]. “De Ordinatione Episcopi Uni Tantum Conferenda: Letouzey 1935. Commentarium,” Ephemerides Liturgicae 83 (1969). 42–58. LAMPE, G. A Patristic Greek Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon 2000. [————–]. “Schema Comparatum Rituum Ordinationis,” Epheme- LANNE, EMMANUEL, OSB. “Les Ordinations dans le Rite Copte: Leurs rides Liturgicae 83 (1969). 61–6. Rélations avec les Constitutions Apostoliques et la Tradition de —————. “’Spiritus Principalis’: Formule de l’Ordination Épisco- Saint Hippolyte,” L’Orient Syrien 5 (1960). 81–106. pale,” Notitiae 10 (1974). 410–1. LÉCUYER, JOSEPH, CSSP. “Épiscopat et Presbytérat dans les Écrits —————. La Tradition Apostolique de Saint Hippolyte: Essai de Recon- d’Hippolyte de Rome,” Rechérche de Science Religieuse 41 (1953). stitution. 2nd ed. Munster: Aschendorff 1963. 30–49. BRADSHAW, PAUL F. Ordination Rites of the Ancient Churches of East —————. “Le Pontificale Romain et la ‘Tradition Apostolique’ and West. New York: Pueblo 1987. d’Hippolyte,” Nouvelle Revue Théologique 87 (1967). 601–606. BRANDOLINI, LUCA. “L’Evoluzione Storica dei Riti delle Ordinazi- —————. “Remarques sur les Prières d’Ordination,” in Liturgia oni,” Ephemerides Liturgicae 83 (1969). 67-87. Opera Divina e Umana. Rome: CLV Edizioni Liturgiche 1982. BUGNINI, ANNIBALE, CM. La Riforma Liturgica: 1948–1975. Rome: —————. Le Sacrement de l’Ordination. Paris: Beuchesne 1983. CLV Edizioni Liturgiche 1983. LEO XIII Pope. Bull Apostolicae Curae, 13 September 1896. DZ 1963–6. BURMESTER, O.H.E. The Egyptian or Coptic Church: A Detailed Descrip- LEWIS & SHORT. A New Latin Dictionary, 2nd ed. New York: 1907. tion of Her Liturgical Servicess. Cairo: Soc. d’Archéologie Copte LODI, ENZO, editor. Enchiridion Euchologicum Fontium Liturgicorum. 1967. Rome: CLV Edizioni Liturgiche 1979. —————, trans. Ordination Rites of the Coptic Church. Cairo: 1985. MANY, S. Praelectiones de Sacra Ordinatione. Paris: Letouzey 1905. ABIÉ OBERT C , R et al. The Sacraments, trans. by Matthew O’Connell. MARTIMORT, M. “Le Sacre Épiscopal dans le Rite Romain,” Bulletin Vol. III of Martimort, A.G., ed., The Church at Prayer. Collegeville du Comité des Études 36 (1962). 82–92 MN: Liturgical Press 1986. MERKELBACH B., OP. Summa Theologiae Moralis. 8th ed. Montreal: CAPPELLO, FELIX. Tractatus Canonico-Moralis de Sacramentis. Rome: Desclée 1949. 3 vols. Marietti 1951. 5 vols. OMLOR, PATRICK HENRY. Questioning the Validity of the Masses using CHAVASSE, A. “Le Rituel d’Ordination du Sacramentaire Gélasien,” the New All-English Canon. February 1969. Reprinted in The Robber Bulletin du Comité des Études 36 (1962). 19–37. Church. Stouffville, Ontario: Mattacchione 1998. OOMARASWAMY AMA MD C , R , . “The Post-Conciliar Rite of Holy Or- ORCHARD, B. ed. A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture. London: ders,” Studies in Comparative Religion 16.2-2. Nelson 1953. ORONATA C , M. De Sacramentis: Tractatus Canonicus. Turin: Marietti PASTÉ, ROMUALDUS. “De ‘Forma’ Ordinationis Sacerdotalis in Ritu 1943. 3 vols. Byzantino seu Graeco,” Ephemerides Liturgicae 41 (1927). 511–17. ALMAIS D , I.-H. “Formule les plus Charactéristiques des Ordinations PATROLOGIA GRAECA. Migne. (“PG”) Orientales,” Bulletin du Comité des Études 36 (1962). 384–393. PAUL VI. De Ordinatione Episcopi, Presbyterorum et Diaconorum, ed. —————. “Ordinations et Ministères dans les Églises Orientales,” typ. alt. Rome: Polyglot 1990. La Maison-Dieu 102 (1970). 73–81. —————. Apostolic Constitution Pontificalis Romani, 18 June 1968. DAVIES, MICHAEL. Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre. Dickinson TX: An- AAS 60 (1968). 369–73. gelus Press 1979. Vol 1. PIERRE-MARIE, OP, FR. “Why the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration DENZINGER, H. editor. Enchiridion Symbolorum. 31st ed. Barcelona: is Valid,” The Angelus, December 2005 : 2–16; January 2006: 2–22. Herder 1957. (“DZ.”) PISTOIA, ALESSANDRO, CM. “Note sulla Teologia del Nuovo Rito —————. Ritus Orientalium. Wurzburg: 1863–4. (“RO”) delle Ordinazioni,” Ephemerides Liturgicae 83 (1969). 88–98. E MET OSB D S , B., . “Le Sacre des Éveques dans l’Église Syrienne: Tra- PIUS XII. Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis, 30 November 1947. DZ duction,” L’Orient Syrien 8 (1963). 163–212. 2301. Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique. Paris: Letouzey 1913. (“DTC”) POHLE, JOSEPH. The Divine Trinity: A Dogmatic Treatise, 2nd ed. DIX, GREGORY. The Treatise on the Apostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus Trans. by Arthur Preuss. St. Louis: Herder 1915. of Rome. Re-issued with corrections, preface and bibliography by “Prières d’Ordination de l’Église Ancienne,” La Maison-Dieu 138 Henry Chadwick. London: SPCK 1968. (1979) 143-9. ORONZO MMANUEL OMI D , E , . De Ordine: Tractatus Dogmaticus. Mil- REGATILLO, E. Jus Sacramentarium. 2nd ed. Santander: Editorial San- waukee: Bruce 1959. 2 vols. tander 1949. DOUROUX, B., OP. “Commentarium,” Notitiae 10 (1974). 394-5. The Rites of the Catholic Church. Vol. 2. Trans by ICEL. New York: EASTON, BURTON SCOTT, trans. The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus. Pueblo 1980. Archon 1962. Rore Sanctifica: Invalidité du Rite de Consécration Épiscopale de ‘Pontifi- FORCELLINI, A. Lexicon Totius Latinitatis. Padua: 194. 6 vols. calis Romani.’ Éditions Saint-Remi 2005. rore-sanctifica.org ORTESCUE DRIAN F , A . The Lesser Eastern Churches. London: CTS 1913. ROQUETTE, ROBERT, ed. The Sacrament of Holy Orders. Collegeville GASPARRI, PETRO. Tractatus de Sacra Ordinatione. Paris: Delhomme MN: Liturgical Press 1962. 1893. ROSE, ANDRÉ. “La Prière Consécratoire de l’Évêque,” La Maison-Dieu GENICOT, E. Institutiones Theologiae Moralis. Brussels: DeWitt 1921. 2 97 (1969). 127–142. vols. SC DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH. Declaration Instauratio Liturgica, 25 GINGRICH, F. & F. Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testa- January 1974. AAS 66 (1974). 661. ment and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University Press SC DIVINE WORSHIP. Circular Letter Dum Toto Terrarum, 25 October 1957. 1973. AAS 66 (1974). 98–9; LARE G , P. Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon 1994. SOUTER, A. Glossary of Later Latin to 600 AD. Oxford: Clarendon 1949. RISBROOKE G , W.J. “Les Réformes Récentes des Rite d’Ordination WAINWRIGHT, GEOFFREY. “Quelques Aspects Théologiques de dans les Églises,” La Maison-Dieu 139 (1979). 7–30. l’Ordination,” La Maison-Dieu 139 (1979). 31-72. GY, P-M., OP. “Les Anciens Prières d’Ordination,” La Maison-Dieu 138 (1979). 91–122. Free Information Packet: —————. “Notes on the Early Terminology of Christian Priest- For a free information on the traditional hood,” in Roquette, R. ed. 98–115 Latin Mass, please contact: St. Gertrude the Great Roman Catholic HANSSENS, J.M, SJ. La Liturgie d’Hippolyte: Ses Documents, Son Titut- Church, 4900 Rialto Road, West Chester OH 45069, 513.645.4212, laire, Ses Origines et Son Charactère. Rome: Oriental Institute 1959. www.sgg.org

— 16 —